Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
resopalrabotnick

adelphia in puerto rico

Recommended Posts

I will like to give him the benefit of doubt. It is possible that Onelink by mistake uncapped all the bandwidth or he just get lucky. He need to make some more speed tests possibly with 10MB to be sure.

Anyway....in the morning I was getting around 1 MB of speed. So I guess the issues havent resolved completly, but yesterday I was able to play Halo2 without any problem. I havent played B:MC for a long time so that will be a better indicator.

That test was made with 12MB..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Download Stats ..:::

Connection is:: 416 Kbps about 0.4 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB)

Download Speed is:: 51 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net  (main)

Test Time:: Wed Mar 1 21:45:47 EST 2006

Bottom Line:: 7X faster than 56K 1MB download in 20.08 sec

Diagnosis: May need help : running at only 19.73 % of your hosts average (onelinkpr.net)

Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-CPAYZ02T3

March 1 and its sitll terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they did something (i hink).  Its the first time in months that I can ping an address without getting a request time out.

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]

© Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:Documents and SettingsCreepingDeath>ping -t www.google.com

Pinging www.l.google.com [64.233.161.99] with 32 bytes o

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=115ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=66ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=78ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=242

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just called. they said its happening "Sometime in march".... and that the routers were finnaly moved from adelphia last weekened..

jeeze. its been 2 months and still no set date..

:haha: keep dreaming that craplink will be fixed. :haha:

Keep giving money to them, so  they can still fix it "some time in march:, end march. "some time in april", end april, "some time in june", end june ... so on.

WHAT A JOKE! every month craplink is millions more richer and craped more service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, here are more test after 4:00pm here at PR..

:::.. Download Stats ..:::

Connection is:: 4696 Kbps about 4.7 Mbps (tested with 5983 kB)

Download Speed is:: 573 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net  (main)

Test Time:: 2006/03/02 - 1:29pm

Bottom Line:: 84X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.79 sec

Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 123.3 % faster than the average for host (onelinkpr.net)

Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-3RSL4XT1M

:::.. Download Stats ..:::

Connection is:: 4738 Kbps about 4.7 Mbps (tested with 5983 kB)

Download Speed is:: 578 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net  (main)

Test Time:: 2006/03/02 - 1:37pm

Bottom Line:: 85X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.77 sec

Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 125.3 % faster than the average for host (onelinkpr.net)

Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-YKEM68ZLF

and yess is true they already changed the routers from adelphia to sprint, i also did a test with virtual route look...

=====================================================================================

=== VisualRoute ® 2006 Server Edition (v10.0e) report on Mar 3, 2006 4:46:12 PM ===

=====================================================================================

Report for [host-xx-xx-xx-xx.onelinkpr.net]

Analysis: IP packets are being lost past network  "San Juan Cable, LLC SJCL-SAN-JUAN"  at hop 13.

VisualRoute cannot determine the next network at hop 14.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Hop | %Loss | IP Address      | Node Name                      | Location              | Tzone  | ms | Graph      | Network                                        |

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| 0  |      | 205.234.111.185 | DTG316.visualware.com          | *                      |        |    |            | Defender Technologies Group, LLC DEFENDER-1    |

| 1  |      | 205.234.111.129 | r03-8.iad.defenderhosting.com  | Washington, DC, USA    | -05:00 | 0  | x          | Defender Technologies Group, LLC DEFENDER-1    |

| 2  |      | 205.234.111.17  | r01.iad.defenderhosting.com    | Washington, DC, USA    | -05:00 | 1  | x          | Defender Technologies Group, LLC DEFENDER-1    |

| 3  |      | 208.173.50.153  | -                              | ?Cary, NC, USA        | -05:00 | 0  | x          | Savvis SAVVIS                                  |

| 4  |      | 208.173.50.166  | sl-st21-ash-5-1.sprintlink.net  | Ashburn, VA, USA      | -05:00 | 0  | x          | Savvis SAVVIS                                  |

| 5  |      | 144.232.20.135  | sl-bb26-rly-6-0.sprintlink.net  | Relay, MD, USA        | -05:00 | 18 | x---      | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 6  |      | 144.232.14.173  | sl-bb22-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net  | Relay, MD, USA        | -05:00 | 3  | x-        | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 7  |      | 144.232.7.253  | sl-bb21-rly-12-0.sprintlink.net | Relay, MD, USA        | -05:00 | 6  | x--        | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 8  |      | 144.232.20.176  | sl-bb21-atl-6-0.sprintlink.net  | Atlanta, GA, USA      | -05:00 | 19 | x-        | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 9  |      | 144.232.20.127  | sl-bb20-orl-14-2.sprintlink.net | Orlando, FL, USA      |        | 36 |  x----    | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 10  |      | 144.232.8.22    | sl-st20-mia-4-0.sprintlink.net  | Miami, FL, USA        |        | 63 |  -x------- | Sprint SPRINT-INNET9                          |

| 11  |      | 144.223.64.138  | sl-sanju-1-0.sprintlink.net    | ?Kansas City, MO      |        | 32 |  x        | Sprint/United Information Service SPRINT-INNET |

| 12  |      | 70.45.94.74    | host-70-45-94-74.onelinkpr.net  | ?San Juan, Puerto Rico | -04:00 | 55 |  x        | San Juan Cable, LLC SJCL-SAN-JUAN              |

| 13  | 30    | 70.45.94.97    | host-70-45-94-97.onelinkpr.net  | ?San Juan, Puerto Rico | -04:00 | 54 |  x        | San Juan Cable, LLC SJCL-SAN-JUAN              |

| ... |      |                |                                |                        |        |    |            |                                                |

| ?  |      | xx.xx.xx.xx    | host-xx-xx-xx-xx.onelinkpr.net  | ?San Juan, Puerto Rico | -04:00 |    |            | San Juan Cable, LLC SJCL-SAN-JUAN              |

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

they still having problems here at the island because they only have 2 servers, they need to fix that, one interesting thing is that i hit the link in the host 7 and here is the info it gave me..

      Administrative Contact:

      engleman, jeffrey  [email protected]

      Urb industrial tres monjitas

      1 calle manuel camunas

      san juan, puerto rico  00918

      PR

      787-717-8080

      787-250-7570

there you go now go and attack that dude by phone calls and emails... hehehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just plain stupid ... with adelphia I used to get 2.5 Mbps minimum. The bastards at support just say "we do not guarantee bandwidth". F them  ...

Your connection is: 832 Kbps or 0.8 Mbps

You Downloaded at: 102 kB/s

You are running: 15 times faster than 56K and can Download 1 megabyte in 10.04 second(s)

Member Ident: Username:jquinones CompID:6461232845

Test Time:: 2006/03/02 - 4:22pm

Test ID: P3DV986KS (if this is a screenshot go to testmy.net to see if this is fake)

Diagnosis ^info^: May need help : running at only 39.58 % of your hosts average (onelinkpr.net)

This was tested from a 579 kB file and took 5.703 seconds to complete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dman!  I hate Onelink!  Maybe they'll fix the problem the next millenium... year 3000

C:Documents and SettingsCreepingDeath>ping www.google.com -t

Pinging www.l.google.com [64.233.161.99] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=75ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=83ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=77ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=92ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=76ms TTL=242

Request timed out.

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=75ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=71ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=75ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=242

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=84ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=78ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=77ms TTL=242

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=242

Request timed out.

Reply from 64.233.161.99: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=242

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at 1 AM

:::.. Download Stats ..:::

Connection is:: 2686 Kbps about 2.7 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)

Download Speed is:: 328 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net  (main)

Test Time:: 2006/03/02 - 10:05pm

Bottom Line:: 48X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 3.12 sec

Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 28.09 % faster than the average for host (onelinkpr.net)

Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-XC5Z8O2TM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.30 am

Your connection is: 1056 Kbps or 1.1 Mbps

You Downloaded at: 129 kB/s

You are running: 19 times faster than 56K and can Download 1 megabyte in 7.94 second(s)

Member Ident: Username:unpainted CompID:6460807704

Test Time:: 2006/03/02 - 11:29pm

Test ID: OSXIP58AD (if this is a screenshot go to testmy.net to see if this is fake)

Diagnosis ^info^: May need help : running at only 50.36 % of your hosts average (onelinkpr.net)

This was tested from a 2992 kB file and took 23.203 seconds to complete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5:01 am

Your connection is: 2490 Kbps or 2.5 Mbps

You Downloaded at: 304 kB/s

You are running: 44 times faster than 56K and can Download 1 megabyte in 3.37 second(s)

Member Ident: Username:Robocop CompID:64612570494

Test Time:: 2006/03/03 - 2:02am

Test ID: O03WH4AVS (if this is a screenshot go to testmy.net to see if this is fake)

Diagnosis ^info^: Looks Great : 18.74 % faster than the average for host (onelinkpr.net)

This was tested from a 2992 kB file and took 9.844 seconds to complete

Can't be more crap than THIS!!!

[glow=green,2,500]F Y CRAPLINK![/glow]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they have not capped the gaming.  Not that I know of, i've been able to play weekends with no problems on onelink.  The problem is that during hours in which there is a lot of traffic the routers can't handle the load or we don't have enough bandwidth and thus you can't play.  Simple as that, I've also been able to download torrents with no problems true not running at 300k or 250k it's been some time but i've seen them up to 100k.

Now you guys are all working on rumors as I said before.  Wait for the fix to be done then test your P2P if it continues then you have all the right to bitch and moan about it.  But since onelink still has issues all you can do is sit tight and wait until they get fixed. March 1st is next week.

that means it's time to call them even more now people. the majority of you are paying $55 a month and obviously it's not just for simple web browsing and checking your e-mail... so let's start calling them up and force them to provide customer satisfaction. hell, even drebel encourages you (and he usually is pro-Onelink)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...